masseffectfandomcom-20200222-history
Forum:Chat Live! Policy Revote
Reasons for revote Having a chat on our wiki is good, but I think having a chat with people in it is even better. With this in mind, I propose removing the current restriction of 20 mainspace edits in order to access the chat, and increasing the number of chat moderators to deal with potential troublemakers. Suggestions 1. Users who nominated themselves for new chat moderators are welcome to comment here in order to make themselves known and the administration is welcome to comment on those nominations. 2. Since the issue was discussed extensively during the previous votes, I suggest we keep it brief since we all already know the opinions on "for" and "against". Unless someone wants to add something brand new, that is. Voting Support # As proposer -Algol- (talk) 23:50, February 20, 2013 (UTC) # If it ends at least some of the recent negativity. Avg Man (talk) 04:51, February 21, 2013 (UTC) # I'm up for it. --Nord Ronnoc (talk) 05:16, February 21, 2013 (UTC) # Yups. Phantom Bootie Slap (talk) 06:21, February 21, 2013 (UTC) #If this vote is for removing the edit restriction and promoting new mods I agree Garhdo (talk) 14:26, February 21, 2013 (UTC) #in agreement with Spart. So for now voting yea. If however, that was not what was in mind, id be obliged to remove my vote, if not vote neutral or nay. BeoW0lfe (talk) 16:12, February 21, 2013 (UTC) #So long as the chat mods remember their purpose is to enforce site policy, not be the nice guys who let things slide.--Legionwrex (talk) 23:51, February 21, 2013 (UTC) #If you want more edits, how about dealing with the things that stifle editing? TheUnknown285 (talk) 03:32, February 22, 2013 (UTC) #Thanks for the clarification, -Algol-. Me voting yea may just be a sign of the Apocalypse... SpartHawg948 (talk) 07:35, February 23, 2013 (UTC) #--Officer Eddie Lang (talk) 20:51, February 24, 2013 (UTC) Neutral # didn't we literally just have one of these?--TW6464 (talk) 14:49, February 21, 2013 (UTC) Oppose #No. Lancer1289 (talk) 19:40, February 21, 2013 (UTC) Discussion So... what's the vote on, here? Because you say two different things. First, you say that it's to decide whether or not the policy should stay in effect. You then go on to propose that the edit limit be removed and more chat mods be added. These are two different things, since the policy implemented consisted of more than just an edit limit. So... which is it? Is the vote to revoke the policy change as a whole, or just to remove the edit limit? SpartHawg948 (talk) 00:31, February 21, 2013 (UTC) :When I went through and fixed the page's formatting, I filled in the policy description template with the link to the original policy and the statement about this being a vote on whether or not to remove the whole policy (which I thought was the point of the revote, not just lifting the edit requirement). The rest (except for headers) is -Algol-'s unmodified text. -- Commdor (Talk) 00:42, February 21, 2013 (UTC) ::Ok, so per -Algol-, this vote is just to remove the edit limit and promote some new chat mods? If so, I'll gladly vote for it. Some clarification from him would be nice though... SpartHawg948 (talk) 00:45, February 21, 2013 (UTC) ::I agree with Spart - If that is the proposal then I agree, and would also like to nominate myself as a Chatmod. Garhdo (talk) 14:27, February 21, 2013 (UTC) :::Sorry, I was kinda in a hurry. A certain someone daring me to put up a vote on one side, and PS4 livestream I didn't want to miss on the other. Yes, the proposition stands as it is: remove the restrictions and promote some new CMs. As for other aspects of the current policy, like grounds and terms of ban, no, they are not the subject. For now, at least. -Algol- (talk) 20:46, February 21, 2013 (UTC) ::::I don't recall daring anyone. I merely said that anyone who wanted to start the revote, should. You volunteered, as I recall... Anywho, thanks for the clarification. For what it's worth, you just got another vote for your proposal. SpartHawg948 (talk) 07:34, February 23, 2013 (UTC) I cannot agree with this in any way shape or form. Everyone who is voting for this is flat out saying that making a few edits is to much to ask for someone to use a feature that is a subset of the wiki. To me that is just saying, "we just want to do nothing and expect everything. We don't want to anything that actually requires work." I also will not respond to any comments just berating me for this comment. Lancer1289 (talk) 19:40, February 21, 2013 (UTC) :I can offer only my own opinion here Lancer, which is that the edit restriction OF ANY KIND, is basically penalising people and not allowing them to use the chat. It could lead to sloppy edits as people work just to get enough to chat, and then those people may stop editing completely. A person should only need ONE edit in order to be aware of all policies, after that why should they not be allowed to use chat, provided they then follow those rules. New chatmods can ensure the rules are enforced AND also encourage edits in the chat, so that the new editors coming to the site will be encouraged to help naturally. For example at the moment the Galaxy and Infiltrator articles are sorely needing attention. I, like many am unable to help as I don't own a IOS device. However, mention the fact that those articles need attention in chat, and people who have those games may come forward and volunteer their help. Yes there may be more work in the beginning, just as there apparently was when the chat was introduced, which lead to this whole issue in the first place, BUT if people on this site are willing to make the effort to power through those problems we can have a functioning chat where we can easily discuss and share ideas to improve this wiki, AND bring in a crop of talented new editors, guided by the admins and chatmods to make viable and worthy contributions to the site. Garhdo (talk) 20:17, February 21, 2013 (UTC) :: Actually Lancer, from the way I read what Algol is actually proposing in proposal section the 2 weeks on site with a valid account (meaning at least 1 edit every other day) still stands. So in fact, users do still have to make edits in order to be able to use the chat- so users aren't voting for people to just come on the site solely for the chat, there are still some editing requirements that have to be met. But then again, Algol said in the proposition section of this forum that only the 20 edit count would be lifted, but in the discussion section that "restrictions" (no specificity as to which) should be lifted- so there is some ambiguity here that probably shouldn't be. --''--Isolationistmagi'' 05:15, February 23, 2013 (UTC) Here's the deal. I'll support this, but I will be expecting the chat moderators to do their jobs and make users follow site policy, and if not, kick and possibly ban said user. I don't want Chat moderators letting the breaking of policies that they don't like slide or just giving a bunch of warnings, you will need to be strict. Don't make me regret supporting this.--Legionwrex (talk) 03:45, February 22, 2013 (UTC) :I know that I am more than ready to do that if given the responsibility. When you say strict are we talking 3 strikes and out, or yellow card-red card analogies? Personally I think one warning is enough, after that a ban. Garhdo (talk) 03:51, February 22, 2013 (UTC) ::That's usually how it's done. One warning, then a ban. A ban without a warning is not good though, don't do this :) -Algol- (talk) 11:31, February 22, 2013 (UTC) :::Give them one warning. What I'm saying is if said person breaks it again after said warning, and them tries to say "I didn't see it" or "it won't happen again" or any other variation of that, don't just accept that. Kick said user from chat temporarily.--Legionwrex (talk) 15:18, February 22, 2013 (UTC) Does this vote only remove the edit restrictions, or all of the restrictions that the policy change implemented? If only the former, then I can't agree on it—the two weeks requirements was far more restrictive in my opinion than the edit requirement. LilyheartsLiara (talk) 15:32, February 22, 2013 (UTC) :You bet. The only reason I didn't propose removing the 2 weeks restriction, is that I am not sure the admins would actually remove it. Even if the majority votes in favor of removal. So one thing at a time. If the chat doesn't start working after this vote is over, we can always start a new one. -Algol- (talk) 20:47, February 24, 2013 (UTC) ---- The policy proposal has been approved by a vote of 10-1-1. The user edit quota required for Chat use will be removed from the Chat policy. -- Commdor (Talk) 16:33, March 1, 2013 (UTC)